Proposal 008 – See you in court - FAILS 2 to 8
Submitted by SatyrEyes 

Amend Rule 10, "Request for Judgment," to change "If at any time, the rules are ambiguous, unclear, or appear to contradict each other" to "If at any time, a player believes that the application or nonapplication of a rule to the game was in error".
Create a rule, "Questions of Law", which reads:
"No more than once per Round, a player may privately submit a Question of Law to the Host. A Question of Law is similar to a Request for Judgment, but regards an ambiguity or contradiction in the rules which has not been brought out by the actual application or nonapplication of a rule to the game; a Question of Law must be answerable YEA or NAY. If the Host receives a Question of Law whose answer he feels is self-evident, he shall immediately make a public ruling on it, resolving the Question of Law; his ruling is final, as with a Request for Judgment.
If the Host feels that the answer is not self-evident, he shall choose two players to be Litigants on that Question of Law; these players are to be randomly chosen through an unbiased method of the Host's choice. Immediately after he next distributes Proposals for voting, the Host shall make public all unresolved Questions of Law and their respective Litigants. Litigants shall then post their positions (YEA or NAY) on their Question of Law, along with their arguments backing these positions. Immediately before announcing the results of voting, the Host shall rule on all public but unresolved Questions of Law, resolving them. Any Litigant whose posted position on their Question of Law differs from the Host's, or who failed to post a position, is Eliminated."
FOR: Ornithopter, SatyrEyes
AGAINST: Jolly Jonny, Jon, Jorro, Kevan, Llamizzle, Mat, Ryan, Truman

Proposal 009 – Double Edged Sword - FAILS 3 to 7
Submitted by The Host

Add to the end of Rule 15, “The Immunity Gavel”:
If a player has Immunity for three consecutive turns, they shall lose Immunity one minute before Elimination results are revealed, and then that player will be Eliminated.
FOR: Jorro, Llamizzle, Ornithopter
AGAINST: Jolly Jonny, Jon, Kevan, Mat, Ryan, SatyrEyes, Truman

Proposal 010 - FAILS 3 to 7
Submitted by Mat

Add a new paragraph to rule 4, aka "Proposals", which states:
Any player who does not submit a proposal in a round is immediately eliminated with the start of the respective next round.
FOR: Llamizzle, Mat, SatyrEyes
AGAINST: Jolly Jonny, Jon, Jorro, Kevan, Ornithopter, Ryan, Truman

Proposal 011 – Real Ultimate Power - FAILS 2 to 8
Submitted by Ornithopter

Make a new rule. Title it “Daffynition.” Make it say “The word ‘change’ will be assumed to mean ‘to beat with fish’ anywhere it appears in the ruleset.” 
[Rule 2 now means "Rules 01-05 are High Rules. The players may not beat the High Rules with fish. High Rules take precedence over all other rules.]
Delete High Rule 2.
Renumber all rules so that “Follow the Rules” is 1, and each rule after is the next highest integer.
Delete the rule entitled “Daffynition.”
FOR: Mat, Ornithopter
AGAINST: Jolly Jonny, Jon, Jorro, Kevan, Llamizzle, Ryan, SatyrEyes, Truman


Proposal 012 – Prolific Proponents - FAILS 1 to 8
Submitted by Jolly Jonny

Repeal Rule 6 ("Only One"), enabling players to submit more than one proposal per week. This should permit us make inroads into this game more quickly. 
FOR: Jolly Jonny, Truman
AGAINST: Jon, Jorro, Kevan, Llamizzle, Mat, Ornithopter, Ryan, SatyrEyes